Friday, February 26, 2010

Elon Numbers on Burr

Richard Burr's campaign would like to have you believe that his bad poll numbers are just a construct of liberal biased PPP. They even went and got a story written about it in Politico last summer.

I guess they're going to have to bash the highly nonpartisan Elon Poll now too. It finds today that only 24% of North Carolinians think that Burr deserves reelection, while 51% think it's time to give someone else a chance. Those are pretty devastating numbers.

I still think it's possible that this is going to be not exclusively an anti-Democratic year so much as an anti-incumbent year. That will still make for a tough cycle for Democrats since they account for most of the incumbents, but it also means you could see someone like Burr lose for reelection even as his party gains overall.

9 comments:

The Elon poll is a sample of adults, not likely or even registered voters.

I understand that it's your intent and your right to push an anti-Burr narrative in your writeups, but that's a pretty big omission.

Considering that PPP & Rasmussen find Burr leading his closest Democrat challenger by 10-16 points, people may wish they had a better Senator than Burr, but view the Democrat alternatives to be downgrades rather than upgrades. Voters who wax nostalgic for Jesse Helms are unlikely to actually vote against Burr. And even the Elon poll of adults finds Burr with a 40-35 (+5) favorable approval rating.

I have to shake my head at the dem leadership when we keep seeing Burr's poll nombers like this, and yet they seem to be putting little effort to win his seat. They're to focused on weak incumbant retention. Also, their infatuation with Cunningham over Marshall, who is more liberal and polls better against Burr, is beyond me.

Rasmussen shows Burr actually expanding his lead over both opponents -- Burr holds double digit leads over both, 50% vote shares over both (even with double digit undecideds), and among independents 20+ point leads over both.

You spend more time bashing the accuracy of other polls than any other polling organization, but then rally to the defense of a poll that is based on responses from "residents"? Anything squirrely about a poll that gives net approvals to both Obama AND Tea Parties?

But that's fine - discuss the Elon poll. But also discuss the Mason-Dixon poll, and the Rasmussen polls. Near as I can tell, you haven't. Is that because they show Burr at or above 50 against all challengers?

Out of curiosity, why don't you disclose your conflicts of interest? It's standard journalistic ethics and shouldn't be a big deal. "Not hiding" political affiliation is all well and good, but standard ethical obligation goes beyond that.

It is quite apparent to me that you most obviously opt to pick and choose polls that are most refective of your own political biasis. You refer to Elon Polling as being highly nonpartisan. Yet, their numbers are so out of sync with other polling organizations that they can, rightfully so, be described as being grossly out of touch with reality. You quoted them as showing that Incumbent Richard Burr, a Republcan Senator in North Carolina that 24% of North Carolinans thinks that he deserve being reelected, while 51% don't. When you consider the fact that in The most recent Rasmussen polls, they have Burr up by 16% points over his nearest Democratic candidate (Elaine Marshall), with those considering him strongly favorable ratings versus those considering him strongly unfavorable is 18% - 11% respectively. I might add that, by most accounts, Rasmussen is considered one of the most, if not the most, accurate and credible polling organizations. Elon pol - who? Additionally, your assertion that this year's elections are more about anti-imcumbent sentiments, rather than anti- Democrat. Wrong! If you were to actually look at and objectively analyse and evaluate the more reputable polling services and their respective numbers, regarding this year's elections, you just might come up with a totally different assessment. That is, if you were to be a little more honest about it (and not so biased) as you most obviously are.

I'll try one more time to get my comments posted, as they (the previous ones) are apparently too critical of the clear lack of honesty and ethics as is being demonstrated by the author (Tom Jensen) in his above post/article titled "Elon Numbers on Burr".

Virtally every other credible polling organization in this country shows Richard Burr comfortably ahead (10%-16% points) of his closest Democratic apponent (Elaine Marshall) - and growing. The Elon Poll numbers that are being quoted above are most clearly out of sync with reality. It is so very sad that the liberal bias of PPP and you, Mr Jensen, so seriously diminishes any and all credibility that might be otherwise had. All I can say Mr. Jensen is shame on you